Constitutional action seeking adequate regulation of the crime of torture. Case 1822-2011 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to article 201 bis of the Criminal Code and seeks to ensure protection against that crime. The case argues that the definition of the crime needs to be reformed in order to meet international standards. It is a landmark case in Guatemalan constitutional history because it is the defining ruling in which the hierarchy of international human rights law with regards to the Constitution is established. It is also important because it is the first constitutional action by omission that is decided favorably in Guatemala. (Documents in Spanish only)

Amicus Curiae on the protection of women from violence. Case 3009-2011 before the Constitutional Court. The case defends the legality of the law against femicide and other forms of violence against women. The case is important because it seeks to protect women against violence, discrimination and force the state to adopt adequate actions. (Documents in Spanish only)

Amicus Curiae Judicial Independence presented on behalf of Judge Claudia Escobar. Case 4639-2014, 4645-2014, 4646-2014 and 4647-2014 before the Constitutional Court. The case argued a violation of the constitution in the election of Justice to the Suprema Court and the Appellate Courts. The case is important because it seeks to guarantee judicial Independence, the adequate selection, permanence and promotion of judges. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action on the inadequate regulation of the crime of Genocide. Case 2242-2010 before the Constitutional Court. The case strives for an adequate definition of the crime in genocide in article 376 of the Criminal Code. It seeks an adequate protection against that crime and punishment for those found guilty. It is one of the first constitutional actions by omission presented in the country. The ruling points to the integration of all elements of the crime in accordance with international standards. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action against the prohibition of foreign entities to acquire property by inheritance. Case 534-2007 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to the prohibition contained in article 926 of the Civil Code. It is important because it seek to eliminate discrimination against foreigners. The law creates inequality because it limits the possibility of each person to dispose of their property after death. It prohibits foreign institutions, including those that are not for profit, from receiving inheritances. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action against discrimination to indigenous peoples in the regulation of property over land. The case was presented in favor of a collective of indigenous organizations. Case 266-2012 before the Constitutional Court. The case argues that there is inequality in the chapter that regulates property in the Civil Code. It is important because it seeks to end discrimination, to defend the rights of indigenous peoples and to protect the right to property in accordance with international human rights standards and Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action against the prohibition of persons with communist ideologies from working in the foreign relations ministry. Case 1732-2014 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to the Organic Law of the Guatemalan Foreign Service. It argues that a law that discriminates on the base of ideology in obtaining employment in civil service is unconstitutional. It is important because it defends non-discrimination, freedom of thought and political pluralism. It also points out that obtaining employment in the government should be based on merit and not on politics or discrimination. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action against a donor being able to revoke a donation based on ingratitude. Case 5009-2013 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to article 1822 section 2 of the Civil Code. That law allowed for a donor to revoke a gift if the person receiving it later accused him of a crime. It allowed a donor to ensure impunity and to not be denounced to the authorities in exchange for an economic benefit. It is important because it seeks to protect those denouncing crime to the authorities without threats or punishment. It is the first constitutional action where a law is stated to contravene the United Nations Convention Against Corruption and the Interamerican Convention Against Corruption. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action seeking the prohibition of members of Congress from changing political parties. Case 1131-2015 y 2214-2015 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to article 50 of the Organic Law of Congress which allows members of congress to switch to a political party other that the party in which he or she was elected. The case is important because it seeks to defend democracy and establish consequences to those that defraud the electorate with the lack of political stability. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action for protection against members of Congress that switch political parties. The case was presented with the Center for the Defense of the Constitution– CEDECON-. Case 603-2016 before the Constitutional Court. The brief argues that because members of Congress are elected from a list by political party if they change to another party that undermines the value of the vote and defrauds the voters. The case is important because it seeks to prohibit this practice, defend democracy and the coherence of the electoral system. (Documents in Spanish only)

Amicus Curiae against the abuse by members of Congress in issuing subpoenas for citations to Congress. Case presented with the Center for the Defense of the Constitution– CEDECON-. Case 5540-2016 before the Constitutional Court. The case is important because it seeks to stop abuse of power by members of Congress and to guarantee that their actions do not hinder public services to be provided to the population. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action against obstacles to disciplinary actions against professionals that violate the code of ethics. Case presented with the Center for the Defense of the Constitution – CEDECON-. Case 3229-2015 before the Constitutional Court. The case refers to article 26 of the law that regulated mandatory membership in professional bar associations. It is important because it seeks to establish disciplinary measures against professionals that have violated their ethical obligations. The law imposed unsurmountable obstacles to the expulsion of professionals that did not meet their ethical obligations. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action defending free access to courts. Case 2706-2005 before the Constitutional Court. Before this case any court could reject petitions that did not have a stamp tax attached to each page in accordance with article 50 of the Civil and Commercial Procedural Code. This case is important because the law violated free access to courts and conditioned access to justice to a payment. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action for protection against threat of self-imposed amnesty by members of Congress. Case 1401-2017 before the Constitutional Court. The case seeks protection against the threat of members of Congress in enacting a law that would grant them amnesty for crimes and corruption in public procurement and government contracts. It is important because it strives to ensure that public servants are responsible for their actions and promotes the struggle against corruption and impunity. (Documents in Spanish only)

Constitutional action on the adequate regulation of property of indigenous peoples and non-discrimination. The case is presented on behalf of the Indigenous Municipality of Sololá. Case 4670-2017 before the Constitutional Court. It refers to the chapter of the Civil Code that regulates property because it does not recognize communal property. The case is important because it strives for the recognition of the right to property of indigenous peoples in accordance with international standards, ILO Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, their right to be consulted and not to be discriminated. (Documents in Spanish only)